Yahoo story - Catholics softening stance vs gays

[JUGGERNAUT]

Sinnet was quoted that there now is no doubt that homosexuallty is a natural variation of human behavior. Whether you believe that or not is open for debate. We still do not have a degree of certainty on the cause of that variation or the factors that help nuture it. All we do know is that it is an apparent behavior that occurs on a statistical level large enough & in diverse population groups to where it appears that physiology plays a greater role than sociology. Beyond that we know very little. The latest research on the physiology side seems to suggest it's more driven by chemistry than genetics. It may very well be abnormalities that occur during pregnancy turn out to be the greatest factor. Many universities world wide are involved in research programs on the subject so we can be assured of learning more in the decade to come.

 

But really none of that has any thing to do with the Catholic religion & for Sinnet to make the statement is irresponsible. I agree the Church rhetoric on homosexuality is wrong. I understand the late Pope's intentions for making the statements he did but I also feel that by vilifying homosexuality it was as if the Church was supporting pleasurable heterosexual behavior. It would have been far better for the Pope to vilify pleasureable sex (sex outside of procreation) in general & then include homosexuality as a subset of that. The Church is very clear in it's stance on pleasurable sex & the use of contraception during sex. That takes greater precedence over anything else. Homosexual behavior is confined to pleasurable sex.

 

I can't think of any religious or non-religious person (outside of a clerical person) that abstains from pleasurable sex. We all do it. Most of us use some method to avoid pregnancy during sex. But that fact doesn't excuse it from being a sin that requires forgiveness from the almighty. That's the message the Church needs to put forth indifferent to gender preference.

 

As one who worships science over religion (I admit it) I can say personally I am becoming more open-minded as I develop greater relationships with asian people in the far east & japan. It's as if I am learning more about human physiology & sociology than I ever imagined. It's a different world & it makes you wonder why we are designed the way we are. This knowledge repeatedly challenges my faith.

 

It's created a dilemma for me. We are intricately designed for both pleasure & pain.

Why would a creator design us that way if such things as related to sex were forbidden? Is it a cruel joke? Likewise for atheists how do you reconcile the fact that this aspect of our design has nothing to do with natural selection or survival? This aspect of our design (which is not shared by any other life on this planet) can only be the result of intelligent design.

 

The best I can come up with is that it's not part of our original design but rather a form of genetic inheritance as experiences our past down from generation to generation. Again I'm back to accepting the belief that memories are passed through our genes. Something that remains only a theory to day but is picking up steam in studies in asia. It's another question we should have more answers for in the next decade. It might help explain the whole past life phenomenon. Perhaps the original sin we inherited from Adam & Eve is inherited in our design as well.

[soxman352000]

I am a Catholic and I could really care less is someone is gay. As long as they have a good heart and care about others I don't have an issue with them. Do I wish they were not gay? Yes, but I can't decide what other peoples sexual preferences are. I think though that they should keep it to themselves. I don't go out parading in the street going " Heterosexual pride"

[Rex Kickass]

Actually the problem with the Catholic Church is how they relate to homosexuals in relation to their own cathecism. From what I've read, the official word is that a homosexual is an equal member in standing within the Church and should be welcomed and afforded the same standing as anyone else. The only difference is that gay people can't marry in the Church (since the point of marriage in the Catholic Church is essentially one of procreation and little else). But sex out of wedlock and homosexual sex are supposed to be treated equally. They are of the same sin supposedly.

[SuperSteve]

Actually the problem with the Catholic Church is how they relate to homosexuals in relation to their own cathecism. From what I've read, the official word is that a homosexual is an equal member in standing within the Church and should be welcomed and afforded the same standing as anyone else. The only difference is that gay people can't marry in the Church (since the point of marriage in the Catholic Church is essentially one of procreation and little else). But sex out of wedlock and homosexual sex are supposed to be treated equally. They are of the same sin supposedly.

Sex in the Church is to bring two people into one and to create more generations IIRC from HS.